跨越社会改革的门槛:弗洛伦斯·凯利和艾伦·理查兹的社会十字军。

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q2 Arts and Humanities Science in Context Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1017/S0269889723000091
Gabrielle Soudan, David Philippy, Harro Maas
{"title":"跨越社会改革的门槛:弗洛伦斯·凯利和艾伦·理查兹的社会十字军。","authors":"Gabrielle Soudan,&nbsp;David Philippy,&nbsp;Harro Maas","doi":"10.1017/S0269889723000091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper contrasts the research strategies of two women reformers, Florence Kelley and Ellen Swallow Richards, which entailed different strategies of social reform. In the early 1890s, social activist Florence Kelley used the social survey as a weapon for legal reform of the working conditions of women and children in Chicago's sweatshop system. Kelley's case shows that her surveys were most effective as \"grounded\" knowledge, rooted in a local community with which she was well acquainted. Her social survey, re-enacted by lawmakers and the press, provided the evidence that moved her target audience to legal action. Chemist and propagator of the Home Economics Movement Ellen Richards situated the social problem, and hence its solution, not in exploitative working conditions, but in the inefficient and wasteful usage of available resources by the poor. Laboratory work, she argued, would enable the development of optimal standards, and educational programs should bring these standards to the household by means of models and exhibits. With this aim, she constructed public spaces that she ran as food laboratories and sanitary experiments. Kelley and Richards thus crossed the doorsteps of the household in very different ways. While Florence Kelley entered the household to change the living and working conditions of the poor by changing the law, Richards flipped the household inside out by bringing women into hybrid public laboratory spaces to change their behavior by experiment and instruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":49562,"journal":{"name":"Science in Context","volume":"34 4","pages":"501-525"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Crossing the doorsteps for social reform: The social crusades of Florence Kelley and Ellen Richards.\",\"authors\":\"Gabrielle Soudan,&nbsp;David Philippy,&nbsp;Harro Maas\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0269889723000091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This paper contrasts the research strategies of two women reformers, Florence Kelley and Ellen Swallow Richards, which entailed different strategies of social reform. In the early 1890s, social activist Florence Kelley used the social survey as a weapon for legal reform of the working conditions of women and children in Chicago's sweatshop system. Kelley's case shows that her surveys were most effective as \\\"grounded\\\" knowledge, rooted in a local community with which she was well acquainted. Her social survey, re-enacted by lawmakers and the press, provided the evidence that moved her target audience to legal action. Chemist and propagator of the Home Economics Movement Ellen Richards situated the social problem, and hence its solution, not in exploitative working conditions, but in the inefficient and wasteful usage of available resources by the poor. Laboratory work, she argued, would enable the development of optimal standards, and educational programs should bring these standards to the household by means of models and exhibits. With this aim, she constructed public spaces that she ran as food laboratories and sanitary experiments. Kelley and Richards thus crossed the doorsteps of the household in very different ways. While Florence Kelley entered the household to change the living and working conditions of the poor by changing the law, Richards flipped the household inside out by bringing women into hybrid public laboratory spaces to change their behavior by experiment and instruction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science in Context\",\"volume\":\"34 4\",\"pages\":\"501-525\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science in Context\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889723000091\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science in Context","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889723000091","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文比较了两位女性改革家弗洛伦斯·凯利和艾伦·斯沃洛·理查兹的研究策略,发现她们的社会改革策略不同。19世纪90年代初,社会活动家弗洛伦斯·凯利(Florence Kelley)利用社会调查作为武器,对芝加哥血汗工厂系统中妇女和儿童的工作条件进行了法律改革。凯利的案例表明,她的调查最有效的是“有根据的”知识,植根于她熟悉的当地社区。她的社会调查由立法者和媒体重新制定,提供了促使她的目标受众采取法律行动的证据。化学家和家政学运动的传播者艾伦·理查兹(Ellen Richards)认为,社会问题及其解决方案不在于剥削性的工作条件,而在于穷人对可用资源的低效和浪费。她认为,实验室工作将有助于制定最佳标准,而教育项目应该通过模型和展览的方式将这些标准带入家庭。出于这个目的,她建造了公共空间,作为食品实验室和卫生实验。凯利和理查兹就这样以截然不同的方式走过了家里的台阶。当弗洛伦斯·凯利进入家庭,通过改变法律来改变穷人的生活和工作条件时,理查兹将妇女带入混合公共实验室空间,通过实验和指导来改变她们的行为,从而彻底改变了家庭。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Crossing the doorsteps for social reform: The social crusades of Florence Kelley and Ellen Richards.

This paper contrasts the research strategies of two women reformers, Florence Kelley and Ellen Swallow Richards, which entailed different strategies of social reform. In the early 1890s, social activist Florence Kelley used the social survey as a weapon for legal reform of the working conditions of women and children in Chicago's sweatshop system. Kelley's case shows that her surveys were most effective as "grounded" knowledge, rooted in a local community with which she was well acquainted. Her social survey, re-enacted by lawmakers and the press, provided the evidence that moved her target audience to legal action. Chemist and propagator of the Home Economics Movement Ellen Richards situated the social problem, and hence its solution, not in exploitative working conditions, but in the inefficient and wasteful usage of available resources by the poor. Laboratory work, she argued, would enable the development of optimal standards, and educational programs should bring these standards to the household by means of models and exhibits. With this aim, she constructed public spaces that she ran as food laboratories and sanitary experiments. Kelley and Richards thus crossed the doorsteps of the household in very different ways. While Florence Kelley entered the household to change the living and working conditions of the poor by changing the law, Richards flipped the household inside out by bringing women into hybrid public laboratory spaces to change their behavior by experiment and instruction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science in Context
Science in Context 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science in Context is an international journal edited at The Cohn Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Ideas, Tel Aviv University, with the support of the Van Leer Jerusalem Institute. It is devoted to the study of the sciences from the points of view of comparative epistemology and historical sociology of scientific knowledge. The journal is committed to an interdisciplinary approach to the study of science and its cultural development - it does not segregate considerations drawn from history, philosophy and sociology. Controversies within scientific knowledge and debates about methodology are presented in their contexts.
期刊最新文献
Modernism, modernity, and politics in the general history of science: Implications of Herbert Mehrtens' work, from "Vienna 1900" to the Nazi era, and beyond. Brouwer and Hausdorff: On reassessing the foundations crisis George Montandon, the Ainu and the theory of hologenesis Textual materiality and abstraction in mathematics The animal model of human disease as a core concept of medical research: Historical cases, failures, and some epistemological considerations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1